Analysis and Apportionment of Organic Carbon and Fine Particulate Matter Sources at Multiple Sites in the Midwestern United States

References

• Sheesley, R.J.; Schauer, J.J.; Bean, E.; Kenski, D. Trends in Secondary Organic Aerosol at a Remote Site in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 6491–6500.
   Google Scholar
• Eberly, S. U.S. Environment Protection Agency PMF 1.1 User’s Guide; Prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory: Research Triangle Park, NC, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Polissar, A.V.; Hopke, P.K.; Paatero, P.; Malm, W.C.; Sisler, J.F. Atmospheric Aerosol over Alaska 2. Elemental Composition and Sources; J. Geophys. Res. 1998, 103, 19045–19057.
   Google Scholar
• Poirot, R.L.; Wishinski, P.R.; Hopke, P.K.; Polissar, A.V. Comparative Application of Multiple Receptor Methods to Identify Aerosol Sources in Northern Vermont. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 4622–4636.
   Google Scholar
• Polissar, A.V.; Hopke, P.K.; Poirot, R.L. Atmospheric Aerosol over Vermont: Chemical Composition and Sources. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 4604–4621.
   Google Scholar
• Ramadan, Z.; Song, X.-H.; Hopke, P.K. Identification of Sources of Phoenix Aerosol by Positive Matrix Factorization; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2000, 50, 1308–1320.
   Google Scholar
• Song, X.H.; Polissar, A.V.; Hopke, P.K. Sources of Fine Particle Composition in the Northeastern U.S.; Atmos. Environ. 2001, 35, 5277–5286.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, L.; Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K.; Stanier, C.O.; Pandis, S. Advanced Factor Analysis on Pittsburgh Particle Size-Distribution Data; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 118–132.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K. Improving Source Identification of Fine Particles in a Rural Northeastern U.S. Area Utilizing Temperature-Resolved Carbon Fractions; J. Geophys. Res. May 15, 2004, doi: 09210.01029/02003JD004199.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K. Source Apportionment of Fine Particles at Washington, DC, Utilizing Temperature-Resolved Carbon Fractions; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2004, 54, 773–785.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K.; Edgerton, E.S. Improving Source Identification of Atlanta Aerosol Using Temperature Resolved Carbon Fractions in Positive Matrix Factorization; Atmos. Environ. 2004, 38, 3349–3362.
   Google Scholar
• Extended Semi-Annual Data Summary Report for the Chemical Speciation of PM2.5 Filter Samples Project; RTI/07565/06DS; Prepared by the Research Triangle Institute: Research Triangle Park, NC, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K.; Qin, Y. Estimation of OC Blank Values and Error Structures of the Speciation Trends Network Data for Source Apportionment; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2005, 55, 1190–1199.
   Google Scholar
• Subramanian, R.; Khlystov, A.Y.; Cabada, J.C.; Robinson, A.L. Positive and Negative Artifacts in Particulate OC Measurements with Denuded and Undenuded Sampler Configurations; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 27–48.
   Google Scholar
• Rice, J. Comparison of Integrated Filter and Automated Carbon Aerosol Measurements at Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 23–36.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods; 4th ed., Issue 3; National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health: Cincinnati, OH; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Birch, M.E.; Carey, R.A. EC-Based Method for Monitoring Occupational Exposures to Diesel Exhaust; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 1996, 25, 221–241.
   Google Scholar
• Malm, W.C.; Sisler, J.F.; Huffman, D.; Eldred, R.A.; Cahill, T.A. Spatial and Seasonal Trends in Particulate Concentration and Optical Extinction in the United States; J. Geophys. Res. 1994, 99, 1347–1370.
   Google Scholar
• IMPROVE. Overview of IMPROVE and Visibility; available at http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/Overview/Overview.htm (accessed 2007).
   Google Scholar
• Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Pritchett, L.C.; Pierson, W.R.; Frazier, C.A.; Purcell, R.G. The Desert Research Institute Thermal/Optical Reflectance Carbon Analysis System: Description, Evaluation and Applications in U.S. Air Quality Studies; Atmos. Environ. 1993, 27A, 1185–1201.
   Google Scholar
• Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Crow, D.; Lowenthal, D.H.; Merrifield, T. Comparison of IMPROVE and NIOSH Carbon Measurements; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2001, 34, 23–34.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, J.G.; Chow, J.C.; Chen, L.-W.A. Summary of Organic and EC/Black Carbon Analysis Methods and Intercomparisons; Aerosol Air Qual. 2005, 5, 65–102.
   Google Scholar
• Jeong, C.H.; Hopke, P.K.; Kim, E.; Lee, D.W. The Comparison between Thermal-Optical Transmittance EC and Aethalometer Black Carbon Measured at Multiple Monitoring Sites; Atmos. Environ. 2004, 38, 5193–5204.
   Google Scholar
• Lim, H.-J.; Turpin, B.J.; Edgerton, E.; Hering, S.V.; Allen, G.A.; Maring, H.; Solomon, P. Semicontinuous Aerosol Carbon Measurements: Comparison of Atlanta Supersite Measurements; J. Geophys. Res. 2003, 108, 5057.1–5057.12.
   Google Scholar
• Schauer, J.J.; Mader, B.T.; Deminter, J.T.; Heidemann, G.; Bae, M.S.; Seinfeld, J.H.; Flagan, R.C.; Cary, R.A.; Smith, D.; Huebert, B.J., Bertram, T.; Howell, S.; Kline, J.T.; Quinn, P.; Bates, T.; Turpin, B.; Lim, H.J.; Yu J.Z.; Yang, H.; Keywood, M.D. ACE–Asia Intercomparison of a Thermal-Optical Method for the Determination of Particle-Phase Organic and EC; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 993–1001.
   Google Scholar
• Paatero, P.; Hopke, P.K.; Philip, K;. Discarding or Downweighting High-Noise Variables in Factor Analytic Models; Anal. Chim. Acta 2003, 490, 277–289.
   Google Scholar
• Paatero, P. Least Squares Formulation of Robust Non-Negative Factor Analysis; Chemometrics Intell. Lab. Systems 1997, 37, 23–35.
   Google Scholar
• Paatero, P.; Tapper, U. Positive Matrix Factorization: a Non-Negative Factor Model with Optimal Utilization of Error Estimates of Data Values; Environmetrics 1994, 5, 111–126.
   Google Scholar
• Anttila, P.; Paatero, P.; Tapper, U.; Jarvinen, O. Source Identification of Bulk Wet Deposition in Finland by Positive Matrix Factorization; Atmos. Environ. 1995, 29, 1705–1718.
   Google Scholar
• Begum, B.A.; Kim, E.; Jeong, C.H.; Lee, D.W.; Hopke, P. Evaluation of the Potential Source Contribution Function Using the 2002 Quebec Forest Fire Episode; Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 3719–3724.
   Google Scholar
• Buzcu, B.; Fraser, M.P.; Kulkarni, P.; Chellam, S. Source Identification and Apportionment of Fine Particulate Matter in Houston, TX, Using Positive Matrix Factorization; Environ. Eng. Sci. 2003, 20, 533–545.
   Google Scholar
• Juntto, S.; Paatero, P. Analysis of Daily Precipitation Data by Positive Matrix Factorization; Environmetrics 1994, 5, 127–144.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Brown, S.G.; Hafner, H.R.; Hopke, P.K. Characterization of Non-Methane Volatile Organic Compounds Sources in Houston during 2001 Using Positive Matrix Factorization; Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 5934–5946.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K.; Kenski, D.M.; Koerber, M. Sources of Fine Particles in a Rural Midwestern U.S. Area; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 4953–4960.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Hopke, P.K.; Larson, T.V.; Maykut, N.N.; Lewtas, J. Factor Analysis of Seattle Fine Particles; Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 724–738.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, E.; Larson, T.V.; Hopke, P.K.; Slaughter, C.; Sheppard, L.E.; Clai-born, C. Source Identification of PM2 . 5 in an Arid Northwest U.S. City by Positive Matrix Factorization; Atmos. Res. 2003, 66, 291–305.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, R.K.; Baker, J.E. Source Apportionment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Urban Atmosphere: a Comparison of Three Methods; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 1873–1881.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, E.; Chan, C.K.; Paatero, P. Application of Positive Matrix Factorization in Source Apportionment of Particulate Pollutants in Hong Kong; Atmos. Environ. 1999, 33, 3201–3212.
   Google Scholar
• Paatero, P. The Multilinear Engine—a Table-Driven, Least Squares Program for Solving Multilinear Problems, Including the N-Way Parallel Factor Analysis Model; J. Graphic. Stat. 1999, 8, 854–888.
   Google Scholar
• Draxler, R.R.; Hess, G.D. Description of the HYSPLIT 4 Modeling System; ERL ARL-224; by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Washington, DC, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• IMPROVE. Standard Aerosol-Type Equations; available at http://vista.cira-.colostate.edu/improve/Tools/AerTypeEqs.htm (accessed 2007).
   Google Scholar
• Fujita, E.M.; Hayes, T.L.; McDonald, J.D.; Sagebiel, J.C.; Zielinska, B.; Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Lawson, D.R. Source Apportionment of Ambient PM2.5 Carbon in the Northern Front Range of Colorado; Paper presented at the 8th Coordinating Research Council (CRC) On-Road Vehicle Emissions Workshop; San Diego, CA, April 20–22, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Lowenthal, D.H.; Countess, R.J;. Sources and Chemistry of PM10 Aerosol in Santa Barbara County, CA; Atmos. Environ. 1996, 30, 1489–1500.
   Google Scholar
• Schauer, J.J.; Fraser, M.P.; Cass, G.R.; Simoneit, B.R.T. Source Reconciliation of Atmospheric Gas-Phase and Particle-Phase Pollutants during a Severe Photochemical Smog Episode; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 3806–3814.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, J.G.; Chow, J.C.; Lowenthal, D.H.; Pritchett, L.C.; Frazier, C.A.; Neuroth, G.R.; Robbins, R. Differences in the Carbon Composition of Source Profiles for Diesel- and Gasoline-Powered Vehicles; Atmos. Environ. 1994, 28, 2493–2505.
   Google Scholar
• Bae, M.S.; Schauer, J.J.; DeMinter, J.T.; Turner, J.R. Hourly and Daily Patterns of Particle-Phase Organic and EC Concentrations in the Urban Atmosphere; J. Air & Waste Manag. Assoc. 2004, 54, 823–833.
   Google Scholar
• Fine, P.M.; Chakrabarti, B.; Krudysz, M.; Schauer, J.J.; Sioutas, C. Diurnal Variations of Individual Organic Compound Constituents of Ultrafine and Accumulation Mode Particulate Matter in the Los Angeles Basin; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 1296–1304.
   Google Scholar
• Chinkin, L.R.; Coe, D.L.; Funk, T.H.; Hafner, H.R.; Roberts, P.T.; Ryan, P.A.; Lawson, D.R. Weekday Versus Weekend Activity Patterns for Ozone Precursor Emissions in California’s South Coast Air Basin; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2003, 53, 829–843.
   Google Scholar
• Marr, L.C.; Harley, R.A. Modeling the Effect of Weekday-Weekend Differences in Motor Vehicle Emissions on Photochemical Air Pollution in Central California; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 4099–4106.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, W.; Wang, Y.; Russell, A.; Edgerton, E.S. Atmospheric Aerosol over Two Urban-Rural Pairs in the Southeastern United States: Chemical Composition and Possible Sources; Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 4453–4470.
   Google Scholar
• Thurston, G.D.; Ito, K.; Mar, T.; Christensen, W.F.; Eatough, D.J.; Henry, R.C.; Kim, E.; Laden, F.; Lall, R.; Larson, T.V.; Liu, H.; Neas, L.M.; Pinto, J.P.; Stolzel, M.; Suh, H.; Hopke P.K. The workshop on the source apportionment of PM health effects: inter-comparison of results and implications; Environ. Health Perspect. 2005, 113, 1768–1774.
   Google Scholar
• Draft 2002 National Emission Inventory (NEI); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Research Triangle Park, NC, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Ogulei, D.; Hopke, P.K.; Zhou, L.M.; Paatero, P.; Park, S.S.; Ondov, J.; Receptor Modeling for Multiple Time Resolved Species: The Baltimore Supersite; Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 3751–3762.
   Google Scholar
• Chung, A.; Chang, D.P.Y.; Kleeman, M.J.; Perry, K.D.; Cahill, T.A.; Dutcher, D.; McDougall, E.M.; Stroud, K. Comparison of Real-Time Instruments Used to Monitor Airborne Particulate Matter; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2001, 51, 109–120.
   Google Scholar
• California Air Resources Board. Speciation Profiles and Size Fractions– Citations for Organic Gas and PM Speciation Profiles (Excel); available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/speciate/speciate.htm (accessed 2007).
   Google Scholar
• Root, R.A. Lead Loading of Urban Streets by Motor Vehicle Wheel Weights; Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108, 937–940.
   Google Scholar